For every bad bunch of cyclists who don’t stop for red lights etc there is a bunch of pedestrian’s who jay walk or run across crossings when the lights are red for pedestrians and a bunch of motorists who speed, go through red lights etc.
The worst bunch of cyclists are the twats who ride those bikes with tiny wheels and very low seats (the one’s that look like they’re used for stunts) Their “stunts” consist of jumping off kerbs and cycling up the pavement at high speed :rolleyes:
Only if you leave.
I was not implying that cars are safer than bikes merely that for me on my journey to work its twats on bike that cause the most problems.
I don’t give a shit whether you think its statistcally more likely for the general population for me on my journey the problem is asshats on bikes. I concede that there is a much greater likelihood of my being injured or killed by a motor vehicle were I to walk out in front of one, but htis rant was not about cars or about decent law abiding cyclists, just the arseholes who nearly knock me over at least once a week at present. Combine that with your asshattery in defending these gits and I have to wonder if you’ve understood a word I’ve said.
Yes, you’re a hundred to one statistical blip. You’re like that poor little fellow from that book (is it “The Phantom Tollbooth”?) who wanders around in a little raincloud while everywhere else is in sunshine.
Or you’re an exaggerating git who’s been called on it, one of the two.
And to expand on that, this is what you said in your OP:
This is what you said a couple of posts ago:
So what we note is that at least when it suits you, you are talking generally. You are generally trying to suggest that cyclists are the major problem to pedestrians, and you are trying to suggest that the hundred to one data against you is misleading because pedestrians in general manage to do an amazing job of avoiding accidents with cyclists.
But now you’ve realised that that won’t fly, so you are trying to suggest that all you were ever talking about was your own rather anomalous personal experience of cyclist dangers.
Have you though about what it might mean that your experience of danger from cyclists is one hundred times that of the general population? Because it does kind of suggest to me that you may be looking in the wrong direction for the cause of the problem.
Got a mirror handy?
Neither, the fact is that with the exception of car drivers who go through red lights (IMHO much fewer than cyclists) if I cross the road safely I’m in much greater danger from cyclists here.
I have never implied that car drivers are saints or that crossing a road in front of cars is safe, just that for me, using predestrian crossings on my journey to work, my greatest hazard is cyclists.
Which part of that is hard to comprehend? I’m not saying that I live in a special part of the universe in which the laws of statistics don’t apply.
If you just keep narrowing your position down, eventually you’ll reach a point where you’ll be too small a target for me to be able to attack with statistics. You’re not at that point yet, sad to say.
According to this page of statistics from the UK transport department, on pedestrian crossings in 2003 amongst pedestrians there were 78 deaths, 757 serious injuries and 3016 slight injuries.
I have not been able to find any statistics as to how many injuries to pedestrians on pedestrian crossings were caused by bikes in 2003. But hey, your position is so utterly fucked that I can afford to be generous. Let’s assume that every single one of the deaths and injuries caused to pedestrians by bikes in 2003 occurred on a pedestrian crossing.
On that basis, from the same page cited by me before we find that there were, in 2003, 4 deaths, 45 serious injuries and 159 slight injuries to pedestrians caused by cyclists.
So even if we assume that every single one of the deaths and injuries caused to pedestrians by bikes in 2003 occurred on a pedestrian crossing (a massively favourable and entirely unjustified assumption in your favour), no more than about 6% of pedestrian crossing injuries to pedestrians are caused by bikes.
I know you are “not saying that [you] live in a special part of the universe in which the laws of statistics don’t apply.” [My emphasis]
But it would seem nonetheless to be the gist of your position.
You just go on quoting statistics, I know what I experience every day.
In fact yesterday I almost saw Darwinism in action, one cyclist shot through a red light in front of traffic, only the fact that the evil motorist braked and stopped meant that the idiot survived, as there was no actual physical injury this will not make your statistics. I did however happen. No parallel reality, no statistical anomally, just a lucky twat who got away with it this time.
Don’t let the facts get in your way, by all means.
I will concede though that I perhaps got carried away and overgeneralised.
I should have confined my initial rant to the idiot cyclists that I have encountered on my walk to work in Manchester UK. Happy now?
As far as I’m concerned I have had my rant about cyclists, however, if you wish to keep posting statistics I will drop in from time to time just to give you an audience.
Just out of curiosity though, have you ever been a pedestrian in the UK? It may be completely different in Oz, maybe you have a more considerate type of cyclist. I don’t know, I’ve never been there.
As stated previously my rant was born from personal experience, you claim I’m a statistical anomally, maybe technically that’s true, but if you read many of the other posts here you will see that I am not alone in my opinion
I cycle to and from work every day. This involves cycling down city streets with the pavements crowded with pedestrians. Pedestrians are a pain. They tend to cut across in front of me as if I’m not there, which gives me the shits. They do this much more often than cars.
Unlike you however I tend to try to base my views on objective facts and data, not kneejerk reactions. I know that however annoying pedestrians are, the reality is that actual collisions with pedestrians are rare because both bikes and pedestrians are light and manoueverable and collisions wouldn’t be that serious even if they were to occur.
Collisions with cars are actually much more likely and serious. In fact (as opposed to in impression) cars are the major danger to me.
Some of us can mould our impressions with the data, some of us throw the data out the window if it doesn’t suit our impressions.
I lived in the UK for three years. There’s not much difference.
Sorry Stryfe, I posted post #150 before I saw your post #149. If I’d seen the former before posting the latter I would have adopted a more conciliatory tone.
That’s ok. I’m not offended.
you are wrong about me though, I usually do take the facts into consideration. This thread started off as a rant after a particularly near miss on the way to work.
I also accept your view that from a cyclists point of view pedestrians are equally hazardous, and I accept that cars and motor vehicles are equally dangerous to both.
Rants by their very nature are not logical, if was going to analyse the problem I would have out this in GD, but I was unhappy so I put it in the pit.
In fact I was surprised that this ran on as long as it did, I had all but forgotten about this thread and suddenly there it was again. One or two of your earlier remarks got my back up and I leapt back in without to much thought I admit.
Aaaaaaaaaaaagh!
No they are not. And you were doing so well…
Ok remove equally.
Cheers